 We're going to go ahead and call the actual meeting to order for March 22nd and can we begin with a, we're going to swear in new directors, are they here? I'm not sure if they're here. Okay, so we're going to have to hold off on that. All right, and we're going to move to a roll call. Director Rockford? Here. Director Kaufman Gomez? Present. Director Gonzalez? Present. Director Leopold? Director Lynn? Here. Director Matthews? Here. Director Myers? Here. Director McPherson? Here. Director Rockwell? Here. Director Rockford? Exefficio Director Northcutt? Here. Okay, so we're going to go ahead and recess at this point to a schedule annual Santa Cruz Improvement Corporation SCCIC agenda, and we'll begin that with a call to order. And what we need to do is consider the appointing of Directors Badoork, Leopold McPherson, and Gonzalez to serve as the SCCIC board members. Can we do a roll call for this group? Director Badoork? Here. Director Leopold? Director McPherson? Director Kaufman Gomez? Present. And Director Gonzalez? Present. We have a call. Okay, good. Are there any oral or written communications? Any additions or deletions to the agenda? I'm sorry. I'm sorry, buzz. I'm sorry, buzz. I didn't see it. Are you here for this? This is a special committee meeting not to do with oral communications. No. This is the SCC I need. Yeah, this is not for the regular meeting. Thank you. I'm going to make sure I let you speak. Okay, but this isn't the right time. Yes, and that takes us to additions and deletions to the agenda. Okay. This is just the SCCIC meeting. I know that. We did not. I'll take a motion to vote on those officers. I'll make a motion that will approve the officers. All right. Second that? Okay, I'll take it. Great. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? That carries to appoint those officers. Thank you for that. Okay, and that takes us to a motion to approve the prior year minutes. I'm one of the two members here. I'll make a motion to approve. Motion? I'll second the motion. Okay. Motion to approve the minutes for 2018. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? That carries. And then we have the acceptance of the financial statements. From this point, I'll turn it over to keep going. Well then, I need a motion to accept the financial statements of 2018. I'll move. I'll move and second it. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? That carries. And that was a simple level of adjourn to the next SCCI board meeting next year. And we will now go back to our regular schedule and reconvening the board of directors meeting. Thank you for everybody's patience for allowing us to do that. Angela, thank you for your backup assistance. Okay. So at this point, we're going to go with the announcement. I want to announce that Carlos Landeverry is here as our expansion interpreter. Carlos, you have come up and share everybody's information. Thank you. Good morning. Buenos dias, directores. Carlos Landeverry, your interpreter. Para las personas que prefieren español, voy a estar en la parte de ellas. Gracias. I just want to announce that today's meeting is being broadcast by community television of Santa Cruz and our individual doing that is Mr. Lynn Dunn. Thank you, Lynn, for doing that. Okay. At this point, we now have a regular scheduled meeting and we have oral and written communications with boards. If anybody would like to come up, please introduce yourself and go ahead. Okay. My name is Beth Anderson. I'm a resident of Lai Boat. I grew up in Capitola and lived there all my life. I recently retired. I said I wanted to urge the Metro Ward to continue to advocate for better bus service than Santa Cruz. Buses are an integral part of transportation solutions in the county and will become even more important in the coming years. Buses are low polluting, more so as the clean transitions to electric power. They are affordable. They can access any road in the county. They can transport large volume of passengers. They are flexible in being able to change routes and schedules. And they can offer different capacities to service in the way of ridership remains. But you know all of that. I'd like to remind the board that with communities prioritize expensive fixed rail passenger trains in attempts to solve transportation issues, financial resources for buses diminish. This has happened all over the country to the detriment of all groups of citizens. The truth of the matter is that trains do not attract enough ridership to justify their absorbent costs. Only the most dense cities do to make any sense. Trains do not help in alleviating highway congestion and they require much more tax money for maintenance and subsidies. Statistically, for every new train commuter added, four bus riders are lost. Santa Cruz is not even fit for a train. Our population is too small and our jobs are not centralized. Buses better serve our community. The Santa Cruz Metro has strong representation of a local RTC board. Please don't succumb to the idea of a train no matter how seductive it is presented. An approved bus system is a better fit for our county. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, Brian, people of Strayall now. A lot of people ask me why I have a passion for the trail. And I usually tell them I actually have a passion for transportation. For 30 years, I've been involved in transportation, I've written state legislation, managed shuttles in the Caltrans, supporting the Caltrans in the Silicon Valley. I've been on the Silicon Valley leadership committee. I have a passion for transportation because it impacts all of us. Each of us feel the pain of transportation, of poor infrastructure. That single worm I think about all the time, having the driver of kids to school, the parents driving over 17, all of us stuck on highway one traffic. Poor transportation impacts all of us. Poor transportation impacts the poor even more so because they don't have the flexibility. I'm passionate about improving the quality of our community through transportation. March 13th, I attended the California Transportation Committee meeting down in Los Angeles, where Executive Director of Santa Cruz Regional Transportation Commission was presenting the train plan. We went to educate the CTC on the facts. Guy talked about a tourist train, about our tax dollars going towards the tourist train. And the surprised guy was the California Transportation Commission did not agree with his plan. They actually opposed it. They said, 20 years we've been sitting here dealing with this corridor, and you come with no plan. They actually said that. We followed up with the facts giving on details of the RTC's unified corridor study showing that his proposed plan was really just to save Proposition 116 funds, was not related to improving our transportation at all. CTC did not support the train plan. I was there in Los Angeles. This was March 13th. What people don't understand is the engineering behind transportation. This single highway lane moves 2,000 people an hour. The trail based off of the unified corridor study is 800 people an hour. 800 people an hour. Think about it. We have three main corridors. So Cal Highway 1 and the Coastal Corridor. We have one of them blocked. Closed. Keeping the Coastal Corridor closed for 20 years is wrong. It's a false assumption. The Regional Transportation Commission did not understand the California Transportation Commission's position. So I'm here to remind us we're here to improve transportation because we're all impacted by it. And currently, the current plan by our transportation agency is all political. It's not technical. And that's shameful. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Anyone else like to address the commission? Okay, we'll go ahead and close communications. At this point, I'd like to bring up one of our new executive directors, Steven Preston. Welcome. And we're going to go ahead and have you sworn in. Julia, are you going to do that? Yep. Okay. So I think you can do this here. What do you want to do with that? Sure. Stay right there for now. Hi, Steven Preston. Hi, Steven Preston. Do you solemnly swear or affirm? Do you solemnly swear or affirm? That I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic that I will bear truth, faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I'm about to enter. Steven, welcome to the Board of Directors. Nice to have you here. Thank you. Good to be. Okay, we'll get back on track. Are there any written communications from the MAC? Nice. At this point, any communications from labor organizations? Welcome, James. James, I have the most smart look of 23. First, I want to say thank you for the Driver Appreciation Day. It was awesome to see you guys out there, Mike on the grill and everybody serving food and talking. It was awesome to see. I apologize that I wasn't able to be there longer, but I had, you know, I was running around handy, so I just wanted to say thank you. Also, I want to say thank you for all the meetings that I've had with you guys, Aurelio, Ed, Mike, Bruce, Donna, our pending meeting. And I'm still hoping to meet with the rest of you guys, and I just want to emphasize how important it is to keep these healthy channels of communication open. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. This is SEIU on the SEA chapter president, and I know that we do have several new directors that I haven't had the chance to meet yet, so I hope to be able to do that in the near future. I just wanted to give a brief report, let the board know that SEIU has begun contract negotiations, and so far, so good. We've had two negotiation meetings so far, and thanks for going smoothly. That's great news. Any other communion representatives? Okay, we'll move on. Any additional documentation we can do that in? Okay. Bring this to our consent agenda. This is an item we usually deal with all in one motion. Is there anybody on the board that would like to pull anything on the consent agenda? Anyone from the public would like to speak on moving on to the consent agenda. Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. Group approval with the consent agenda. Motion by Rogan, seconded by McPherson. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Consent agenda carries unanimously. Okay, it takes us to our regular agenda, and we're going to begin with some longevity awards. We have two awards, and Mr. Rock, I'll have you read the presentation with all the awardings. Is your attention to read the full information? I'm sorry, what? Would you like me to read the full information? Absolutely, why not? Okay. Who are we going to start with? Elmer Torres. Come on up, Elmer. Elmer has worked for us and attended El Palomar High School in Malibu, El Salvador. He came to Santa Cruz, El Salvador, shortly after the armed conflict there. He married Lili Bet Torres, August 22, 1998. He was the parent of two sons, Amaras Torres and Rosalia Torres. He started working at Metro as a custodial service worker in 1999. He's promoted the facility's worker one in 2000 and promoted the facility's worker two in 2011. It's quite a career here with us. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for the opportunity to work at the Metro. I would love my job. I got a great manager and great supervisor right there and a great crew to work with. We have to see everyone around here, Mr. Cley, for me who is friendly to me. And I remember seeing you 20 years ago. We used to visit the facility at Appleboro, right? Right. It was like that. Well, thank you very much for these years. I've been great and I'm looking forward to the next 10 years. I'm looking forward to that. Thank you. 20 years straight top. Next we have Isaac Holley. He's also looked for 20 years. First of all, if you understand the modern world, you understand that this one person is responsible for us all being able to do anything in this district. He's in charge of the technology that keeps this district going. And probably in transportation, we depend more on technology than lots of other spheres in life. And so he's a key player here. But just so you know, a little bit more about him outside of that, he enjoys playing various musical instruments, composing and engineering music, motorcycling and travel. He's also a foodie. You wouldn't know what to look at him. He enjoys cooking and fine dining. But he's really the work out regime I have. I pray not. Yeah, exactly. So it's amazing to think, I started out at 231 in downtown, and the IT department actually, the MIS department at the time. Terry Gale upstairs in the Basso building next door. And when it got busy, he started, you know, started twitching. His twitch going, some of you may have called this, but it didn't work yet. I didn't develop that twitch as of yet. But yeah, there's still time. But it's been an honor to become a leader here at St. Louis Metro. It's been a great career opportunity. And we have a great family here. Operators, staff, management. We're great groups. And I look forward to many more years for this. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right. Okay, this is now our presentation. We have the Santa Cruz County Operational Plan and Practice Report. And we have Matt Vashada to give us a presentation. Welcome, Matt. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Matt Vashada. I'm representing Santa Cruz County today. I'm one of the Deputy CAOs and I'm the Director of Public Works. And I appreciate you taking the time, giving me the time today to share with you a brief presentation on our county effort to operational under a strategic plan. I'm going to show you this one right here. And so I'll just dig right in. Today I'd like to provide a brief overview of our county strategic plan. I'll provide an update on the operational planning process and an overview of operational plan elements that help provide an update on our efforts. And finally, I'll briefly discuss next steps and give you an opportunity to provide comment if you have any. So our strategic plan is a result of a year-long effort where we engaged thousands of citizens and staff to develop our vision, our mission, and our values as you see here. As well as six focus areas with related goals. So the six areas that we developed for focus are listed here. We also have these weather descriptions on our website. And the website is sccvision.us. Today we'll focus on reliable transportation because that's what you all do. And we do that as well. So together we can make that a better process and make better results. Let's talk about the plan hierarchy here. So this diagram shows the hierarchy of our strategic plan and operational plan elements. The strategic plan serves as our north star of providing a vision of the future. The operational plan will provide our approach for strategic plan implementation. The first two-year operational plan will establish our county-wide strategies with department objectives and key steps for achieving the 24 strategic plan goals. This will be an important step in changing our county culture and collaborating with departments and other stakeholders to achieve a vision of the strategic plan. Overtime the operational plan will fully integrate with continuous process improvement, performance measurement, and the new two-year budget the county is proposing currently. So how did we get here? Over the past year and a half or so, as the county developed our strategic plan, we listened to our community. Over 3,000 community bosses, staff, over 1,000 staff from our departments, partners, and we created 180 objectives, department objectives. So each department came up with quite a few objectives that we'll be able to measure and focus on. So the point here is to develop the operational plan, not in a vacuum, but rather to take into account the existing input and goals of all. So department collaboration is a priority. This is a piece of artwork that we developed and it really shows the connectivity between departments. I'll point out that the thickness of the line is the magnitude of the interaction between departments and, for instance, I represent public work, so if you look at public works and how we connect to planning from the top left, that's a rather thick line because that's the type of interaction that we have. But you'll see that many, many departments interact with each other and so collaboration is clearly the key. We're also working on embedding our county values and our strategies. The county provides services and support and supports partnerships built on these values. You see them here listed in the table. For today's meeting, we did provide a handout with the 54 draft strategies. The strategy statements describe the county's approach in achieving our strategic plan and goals. All of the strategies follow the same format. We will act to have an impact. So this is our framework here. This framework is intended to provide consistency and assist with comprehension of the strategies. They're quite varied, but we felt that if we could follow the same format, they would be understandable and relate to each other. I will now discuss strategy development for reliable transportation, which is of utmost importance to all of us here. So under reliable transportation, we developed a subcommittee. Our subcommittee was composed of representatives from public works, planning, economic development, human services, health services, and the CAO's office. The strategy we're highlighting today for you is the goal of public transit. We had other goals as well, and I'll share those with you now. They included regional mobility, community mobility, and local roads. The themes that emerged in our discussions of public transit were around increased reliability and equity for people with limited transportation options and integration of public and alternative modes of transportation. The strategy here speaks to partnering with agencies such as Metro to prioritize development that makes public transportation viable and desirable. Some of the projects or initiatives identified to support this strategy are around planning efforts such as the coming housing element, through our general plan update, and overall transportation planning. Also, we're looking at options within the county that reduce overall traffic, such as opening additional office space in South County. So we have presented these draft strategies to the Board of Supervisors, and are now asking this body to consider them as well. In particular, we would like to know what you find useful or important in one of these strategies. Finally, it is important to reiterate that this operational plan is the first step in a long-term vision to change the county culture. We value your input and ask for patience in terms of seeing any particular feedback materialized in this particular plan. In addition to presenting the various commissions and boards, we will have two additional venues for community engagement. We'll develop focus groups with subject matter experts which are being scheduled at the end of this month, and the county will host three community open houses in April. The open houses will be held in the North, Mid, and South County locations. So in suffering, I would appreciate any feedback you have. And of course, you can always email our CEO, CAO, at visionatsanacruzcounty.us. That concludes my presentation, and I'm here to answer any questions or take your comments. Thank you for that presentation. Any comments or questions for Mr. Machado? As one of the board members shared on the board of supervisors, I wanted to just explain how excited we are in the county to have the first strategic plan in the county. It's taken a lot of work, but it's really resulted in a lot of collaboration, as you can see from that modern art scheme up there. I have been a supervisor going into my seventh year now. I have not ever seen, prior to this as well, having some association with the county, the collaboration effort, the excitement of people working together to come to come, resolution to come to problems, particularly in planning and public works. You can see a one-stop station coming in very, very quickly that will help the planning and public service transportation aspect of what's going on in the county. I am really excited about this. Carlos Blasio, our CAO, is to be congratulated on bringing this. One of the first steps he says I want to do is put this together and get us working together. It's literally working out very well. I appreciate that effort with the county, and I really do encourage each of us if we have some suggestions, let us know because we want to collaborate and get it together so we can provide these services, particularly in transportation here, to the most efficient way possible, the best services possible. Any other comments or questions? Yes. For example, we know that the station downtown is an issue that we have in terms of the discussion. Can you walk us through a process, the strategy that was identified, how that would work through the system? So, you know, our focus will be to collaborate with you and, you know, for the most part, we interact at the road level. And so where we can be a partnership is that when we look at opportunities for transportation improvement, we need to consider the bus system. Now, sometimes, you know, if the jurisdictional boundaries aren't the same, if your station is not in an unincorporated area, we won't have the same interaction, but when you run your buses in the system through the unincorporated area, we feel like there's some real opportunities to coordinate whether it's signal work, whether it's specific bus improvements, whether it's the information, the technology interaction, or bus stops. And so we see this at the ground level where we can coordinate our efforts with your efforts. And it may not apply to all your infrastructure. Some of your infrastructure is not in our jurisdiction, so it'll be a jurisdictional area as well. Thank you. Director Rocking. I just wanted to appreciate that you're taking this approach, because people's experience in government is kind of like, well, we do this stuff because we've always done this stuff, and this is what we do. And you ask them, well, why this, or not that or something, and actually sit down and require that everything you do be the test of, we're doing this for this reason, and this is what we expect the outcome to be. It's really going to be helpful. So I appreciate that this is the way you approach this. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the presentation. You know, everything that comes to our, we're supervisors, is they have to align with our strategic plan. You have to, it's part of the board memo to say, are we actually operating the plan? I think the areas where we would look in the future to working with Metro, as we continue to do our work on our sustainable Santa Cruz County plan, is what's the role as we look at increases in densities on transit corridors? What's the role of the bus system? Should there be requirements for things like eco passes in certain kinds of development? So I think there's a great opportunity to use that strategic plan to work with our partners to make things happen. Mayor? I would just remark, I'm pleased to see the strategy three regarding prioritizing transit-oriented development and I know in the city we will hopefully in our downtown area have a variety of opportunities in the coming years to really test that theory and hopefully get people living downtown. Those people who work downtown but also may need to be going out to the hospital or South County, so I'm hoping that we can work together and put some of these kinds of things on the ground in the coming years. It's a great strategy. Other comments? All right, Mr. Michano, thank you for that presentation and I hope that Metro's connectivity line on your chart gets to be a bigger one. We love that, so everything you do for us. Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay, that takes us to our CEO report. Thank you, Chair and Director, it's a number of items. I think your indulgence. I want to go through certain pieces of legislation that are going on right now. AB 1351, introduced by Simba Nolaki, imposes some pretty stringent paired transit requirements upon transit properties across the state. We are working through the CTA to help the author understand why those types of changes go well up and beyond what the federal government requires. If that were to pass in its current form, not only is it an unfunded mandate, but it imposes things like a seven-day constraint on certification, which is very difficult for transit properties across the state to achieve, it could change our current bear structure, and we would likely have to add drivers and vehicles. So it's a very costly mandate and we're working through the CTA and the California Transit Association to help the author understand that. AB 784 by Moline is a state sales and use tax exemption for zero-emission buses. As you can imagine, we're wholeheartedly in favor of that. That on each bus purchase is estimated to result in a savings of about $30,000. So we'll take everything we can get, especially given the fact that a compressed natural gas bus is about $700 to $750,000, and a zero-emission bus is in the realm of about a million dollars. There's a big difference there across the bridge. AB 1568 by McCarty, local streets and roads dollars tied to housing production targets. Obviously that doesn't necessarily affect us right now, although given the talk at the state by the governor, you never know. But I think for now we're at least saying that transit should support our cities and counties and we're concerned about tying local streets and roads dollars to housing targets. AB 11 Chu or Chow allow cities and counties to create affordable housing and infrastructure agency. Not super connected to transit, but we're watching that because that's more of an example. If counties were able to reestablish something that looks like a redevelopment agency and cities were able to do that, Pacific Station could potentially be a bad factor in partnership with the city. So that's one that we're monitoring, although there's not a direct linkage. And then SB 50 by Senator Wiener, Planning and Zoning Housing Development, Equitable Communities Incentive, imposes affordable housing requirements in areas of transit stations and high-frequency bus lines. We are evaluating whether we have any lines that have sufficient frequency to qualify under this legislation. I was a little surprised to see the chamber took a position strongly in favor, but I think we're just relatively neutral on that for right now. But generally speaking, on the transit side, I try to support cities and their right to dictate how they plan their cities and what their land uses are. And that does have some impositions that sort of usurp some of that city and county right. So we're just sort of neutral on that right now. On the federal side, there's a lot of talk about the FAST Act and then there's, of course, one more round of funding in FY 20 before there has to be a reauthorization. We were quite surprised to see President Trump last week propose $500 million in additional transportation funds. He actually mentioned, I think, the word bus, which he has not mentioned before, $250 million of that would go to bus and bus facilities and, of course, we applied for those programs. So we're optimistic and we hope he really means it. I'm sure he meant it when he said it. I just returned also this week from a trip to Washington, D.C., the active legislative conference, and as you know, we take board members in April to Washington, D.C. We detach ourselves from that conference because the conference just overwhelms the bill with people and it's an ineffective time to try to communicate with elected officials. And it was somewhat fortuitous, too, this year because they were in recess and nobody was there. So what I did was I was able to gather sufficient information to begin to really refine where we will focus our effort when we go with the board members in April. And they really fall into sort of three areas. One, of course, is similar to my discussion about the President Trump's proposal. We'd like to see that in FY20, next year's funding cycle, that we are plus up again. We get more money than the FAST Act is proposing and the goal there is to get about $702 million more nationwide for the bus and bus facilities program in theory that might be divided between the formula, the money that we would get based on a formula and the money we would have to compete for. Second area, similar to 2009 with the ARAF funding, it's time for another infrastructure package and we're proposing a $7.42 billion infrastructure package and that's really based, that number comes out of the bus coalition, by the way, and it's really based on an inventory of transit properties across the nation asking them what do you need in the way of bus funds to replace your aging fleet and when you roll all that up, it comes up to about $702 million to start getting caught up on all of that. It is interesting to note that as we dug deeper and deeper into this number, that since NAP21 and 2012, which was a reauthorization that's severely cut into the bus and bus facilities program, since then, we have seen about an 18% drop in ridership nationwide and correlating to that, we've seen transit properties reduce their buses by about 18%. I think there's a direct relationship to that because transit properties are having a difficult time funding not only operations, but their capital expenditures, they're having to pull back on the equipment and go through some of the exercises as you did with the comprehensive operational analysis in order to balance the budget we had to pull in some of our service. That has replicated it across the nation and I think that is part of the story we want to tell is that if we can get the money to replace our buses, we can hopefully bring ridership back up and go in the right direction. And then the third point is the fast act reauthorization. Baseline asking for at least 13.82 billion dollars in transit funding over six years. Again, looking at the inventory backlog of buses and other facilities to be prepared that drives that number. We also saw that they won't be able to do that and the highway trust fund is going to be severely impacted and we'll go severely negative within a year if they don't do something about stable recurring funding and what is being proposed really both by AFTA and the bus coalition is that the federal government looks at a 25 cent federal gas tax increase in order to fund the highway trust funding and start attacking the backlog of state repair. And then of course in our mix because we receive small transit intensive cities what we call stick dollars to the tune of about 2.2 million dollars a year we want to see the stick program go from its current two percent level to three percent and that will be part of our lobbying effort. So those three things is what we'll cover. I think it's very focused. We'll be able to get in and out of the offices and say this is what we need to please out. Yes. Can you explain maybe new board members are not so aware of the difference between AFTA and the bus coalition? Sure. AFTA is the, well they're both nationwide organizations. AFTA is the trade organization for bus and rail for transportation to the whole nation wide which all sometimes creates some interesting challenges between bus competing for rail money and AFTA is a hard time finding a place to try to be even healed about that. The bus coalition is very focused and was organized for really a single purpose in the post-2012 environment with map 21 when it took all of the fifty to thirty nine money down and just made a very small formula allocation the bus coalition formed and said look we're going to reverse this. It's a horrible thing that you've done to transit properties and they worked and they worked and they worked and actually last year you saw the first sort of fruits of their labor when we got a significant increase in the thirty nine program. So they continue to try to work the awareness program on our behalf nationwide with elected officials so that they understand what map 21 did to us on the bus side when all that money incidentally moved from bus to rail and what it did to us and what it was causing how it has devastated our ability to replace buses and they're trying to not only get the funding level back to where it was in 2012 but they're trying to recoup in the coming years the money that we've lost since 2012. So they've been very effective. It's a great organization to belong to and quite frankly they are putting out better more concise information today than I think after this so I'm very pleased with what they're doing. HR 1139 is the proposed new legislation federally federal transit worker and pedestrian safety act by its title it sounds like a really good thing it's another unfunded mandate it has within it the requirement that we would have to look at driver compartment barriers as you may know in major urbanized cities they do have a problem in some cities with assaults on bus operators we don't have that problem here we feel that legislation like this is just too vanilla to blink approach to just say everybody should do it we really favor more sorting those kinds of things out at the local level I don't know about the current smart leadership's position on this the past position was that our drivers like to interface with the customers they don't like to have a big old shield built around their driver's compartment I don't know if that's changed we'll find that out in the coming days as we interface with the smart leadership on this one but either way we think it should be a local decision as opposed to being a mandate there's a requirement for driver assistive technology we don't know what that means we don't know what that costs it certainly falls into the unfunded mandate category and quite frankly some of those kinds of technologies that are being experimented with today for pedestrian collision avoidance while a great thought to try to get there are ineffective and have proven to be totally useful at this particular point so that's a developing area that's premature to say you need to install something that just really doesn't work yet and then other risk reduction kinds of things that we have to do and we have to do a report annually and then provide it to the secretary of the DOT every three years it's a legislation that needs to be worked with and sort of remolded and then the US Census as you know is getting ready to gear up or is in the process of gearing up and you might initially think as I did why would we be interested in metros in the US Census and actually we have a really big interest in it we'll need to stay involved in that process and help out however we can we ran a quick number I wanted to move who works for Barrow ran a quick number what if the population in Santa Cruz County were under counted by 5% just 5% that would result in a loss of about $400,000 $5,307 money to us we have an interest in the Census being done right but there's other things to watch out for 10 years ago there was an attempt to merge the Salinas San Benito Monterey and Santa Cruz County into one big urbanized area and thanks to Congressman Farr we were able to beat that back and leave the urbanized areas distinctions as they were why is that important well it's really important to us because within Santa Cruz County we have two urbanized areas and those two urbanized areas benefit us in a couple of ways by having two urbanized areas the 265,000 population is split across two urbanized areas and that allows us to to receive what we call again the stick funding the small transit intensive cities for both urbanized areas if we were merged into that one larger group we would lose all of that that would be about a 2.2 million dollar loss to our budget in addition to that on the 5307 side because we are because our urbanized areas are under 200,000 we are allowed to use 100% of the 5307 about 5 million dollars 100% of that in our operating fund and we do use 100% of that in our operating fund if we go to the over the 200,000 category through that big of a merger then you can only use 20% of that in the operating fund so that's a massive loss in excess of 3 million dollars in operating funds you don't lose the money you just have to dedicate it to capital let's put that 3 million all together that kind of a concept if it were to come back again and if it were to prevail it would cost us in the operating fund a 5 million dollar loss we just cannot sustain that and then finally just moving on to our new hires in our promotions we have Jennifer Cortright a paratransit operator Anthony Frey a paratransit operator Juan Serrano paratransit Matt Marquez as you approved last month provisional planning aid Corey Estinoza bus operator and Mario Rodriguez bus operator and Antonio Garcia promoted from DSW-1 to a bus operator Mr. Chair and Directors my remarks and I have to answer your questions any questions for Mr. Estinoza thank you chair the county I'm pretty sure the cities must be involved but the two has a complete count committee that's working on issues to ensure that we get complete count and I can have them reach out to you to figure out what role Metro might be able to play in our efforts to make sure that everyone gets counted yes that would be great I'm not sure if that's the same one maybe the one this week it is I also have some questions about the census previous census there was a really intense year-long effort headed by United Braves well funded without reach I don't know who's heading the Nicole Colbert who's our assistant CAO who's leading the effort it's through my mind I don't know but in the city we should all just be putting some resources to it I'll make sure we get connected with it any other questions or comments I can just see making sure that we get some ads on these buses about the census because we're going to have that ridership that's not to be represented and I think that would be a really good message it goes throughout the county if we can incorporate it out there for it but to that point if there's a discount they must have a logo or message that's one that repeated rather than certainly what I was thinking is maybe we whatever that logo is to be able to get it use it and we need something like this and I think that would be a good start for us to start showing what's promoted that's uniform and attract the attention of those that aren't riders that could be this any other comments I just want to bring up one thing I was fortunate enough on Wednesday to attend the along with the central coast coalition and the executive director of the RTC we went up there and tried to do some lobby for the RTC and we were fortunate to have a meeting with the governor and brought up the question about central one about this interpretation he talked about tying transportation money to housing which was a big concern for this group and I'm happy to say that the governor kind of walked that back and is now saying that the intent is not to take the money away the intent is how we put it a lot of fell under what the cities and counties do in their rena numbers and what he really wanted to stress was not going to make the money contented he just was trying to it was important for all cities and counties to make sure that they submitted their paperwork and marketing their command and informed that there were a lot of cities and four in our district here that did not submit their paper so what the governor is saying is what they really wanted to do is just want you to not have anything that's going to prevent people from doing housing or not enact ordinances I think the only city that they actually sent a letter to about withholding money was Huntington Beach because they just said we had nothing to do with this program whatsoever so I think we left the body which was really concerned about transportation not the room feeling like they acknowledged the SB1 money was ours after all the battles we went through to get it and we could out of his mouth he said we could relax so we're going to take that as a good sign if they've only sued Huntington Beach but there are 11 other jurisdictions that they put on their watch list we're not in that list and like I said there are a lot of them that just paid for work and Mara herself said that the four cities in our area did not she's helping them come to their paper good news alright so let's move on to approval of the fiscal year 2021 preliminary operating budget and for that Angela welcome good morning I normally show to the finance committee and do a presentation and then it comes to 4 more on percent I will leave it to your choice if you'd like you can go through the quick presentation that I did to the finance committee I think the quick presentation would be sufficient we can do that alright so this is the preliminary operating budget for FY 2021 and the preliminary operating capital budget for FY 2020 because you're rolling operating budget for the one year capital budget the reason in preliminary is in red is because this is the very very draft of our budget we'll be coming back with the draft budget in May we put a lot of information together between now and the finance committee in May as to what we're going to do for the reason we put this together we get money from RGC so we have to for a submission to RGC asking for that money for today's operating budget for FY 2021 revenue operating transfers and then only one year of capital budget so on the revenue side of our operating budget or our two year rolling budget we have approximately 54 million dollars in our 18 budget right now going forward in budget 156 and 58 in the corresponding years of 2021 on the right hand side and also the left hand side we're at almost 50% of our revenue is from sales tax and that includes the sales tax that we have in the 70s and we measure the sales tax on the operating expense side we have about $50 million this year going up to about $502 and almost $503 in FY 2021 with that on the right hand side again the majority of it because of our service industry is our lingering fringe only 17% of this is our non-personnel expenses like fuel and parts and things like that operating budget transferring out of the operating budget we are projecting in this current year to be about 3.7 next year about $5 million in 2021 about $5.3 million we're able to take out the operating budget and put it into the reserve funds that we have over there one of the mandates that the board is that they want to put about $300 every year into a fund so that we can start into buses that we still have to replace I'm not sure if that number is down to yet but I know 62 is still our number on to the capital budget these are the projects that they're going to be working on in the coming fiscal year 2020 as you can see we have over $17 million worth of money put into our fleet that means the revenue buses the para-cruise vans the non-revenue vehicles the small railroads which you see some of the operators in and it's that and then the next one is construction related projects that we have going on the funding for those projects that we want to do majority of it is coming from federal grants we may have PTMISCA about $2 that's the 1B money STA and then our transfers from the operating budget that's it I'll learn more detail in May great I have a question just representing Capitola and maybe Scott's Valley and Watsonville are there any plans to add any drivers or new routes? Mr. Chair, directors so this budget has one driver in it for the Watsonville circulator you might recall that we have we're ordering four electric buses one of those was funded through the LCTOP program and that bus is expected to be here in the first quarter of next calendar year which would be this next budget's fiscal year so that bus operator is funded in this budget for the Watsonville circulator and its first year funding is through 802766 grant so it doesn't the first year it doesn't impact us directly, more indirectly then in addition to that we originally had a bus operator program for expansion in this year's budget but we discovered after further evaluation that one of the reasons why we just can't seem to get up to speed and fill all of our bus operator positions is that we can't even push through the training program so we came to you recently in the last month or so and asked you if we could reprogram that bus operator into training at an assistant training an assistant trainer so that we can push more people through the program to get caught up in other words what that means is that you could add all the expansion operators you want but you wouldn't get what you want because we couldn't get trained so we came up with that strategic initiative we think that will help us dramatically and I just want to turn if I could to talk about what he presented to you previously about what we're thinking in that area thank you chair to remember this real quickly you'll remember the last couple of years following the COA I gave an annual report on the status of service planning in August and in last year's report we identified our three priorities for service growth if and when reminder the first one was the position that Alex just referred to that was traded in if you'll allow that expression for the trainer that had been identified a year or so ago to enhance route 35 service up to the two legs in the valley because in the evenings our frequency there is two to three hours between buses I was just one of those cuts from the COA we knew we wanted to get back to cleaning that up to a decent level of frequency our second priority as I told you about last year was the Watsonville Circulator and our third priority was improvements to route 66 and or 68 through LIBO the services that run from Capitola Mall to downtown Santa Cruz and we have two issues there in the evenings one or both of them on weekdays and weekends start stop service so early you heard me always back during the COA was either frequency or span of service a really bad span of service situation there because not everybody's day is eight to five people's days are going to be and we'd like to think as we were reminded by Jared Walker that that section of this community probably has the most transit-oriented demographics density work patterns age group and we'd also like to when the time is available financially we'd like to work on improving the daytime frequency so that's about as deep as we went in our priorities and what I do want to say is when I see you next month just one other thing I wanted to add is that I look forward to sharing more about the big picture of our service level shortcomings relative to our service standards we've had service standards for years we don't relate to them a lot but the COA there were places we had treated our service standards until then now we don't and I'd like to address that topic when I come back with our next slide. Director Lee. Well I appreciate the priorities setting and I just want to point out that the county has approved or is in process of consideration of some major developments in the big county we have approved a 57 unit affordable housing complex on Capitol Road that it's going to include a 20,000 square foot health center and a 10,000 clinic that's going to be heavily used not only by people in Live Oak but throughout the county we are contemplating a major medical facility on Soquel Avenue and we just had a presentation about a major new project on Seventh and Brommer that would have 48 units of housing and lots of visitor serving facilities and so it's going to be important for us in that third priority to match up with what's going to be going on. I think two of those projects could be under development as early as 2020. I know that the housing is going to be assuming the environmental work is complete it will be done. It will be rated good for construction. The hospital or not the hospital the medical facility is looking to be under construction in 2020 as well. I'm not sure if they'll make it or whether that's going to be 2021 and then Seventh and Brommer are roughly around the same time. So I just think we have to be prepared for those changes in development patterns in the mid-county. Good thing is we'll have some time to plan for that so that's good. Question? Director Coffman? Thank you. I see that you have 7% of your fringe and retirees. Can you tell me what the trend looks like on that from where we've been to where we expect that to be going as a result of what's going on with our curves? So the trend goes to our retirees as you know we have a big one for the baby boomers and more of a new retiree. It's going to grow. How much? I can't tell you off the top of the head but the union is going to grow. Kevin look into that a little bit more so I have a good idea of figures financially because 7% of the OLL budget that isn't going to be utilized for the services because we know that the benefits go to the retirees and what not there but as that number grows it also shrinks in what we can do with capital and other projects. I just want to really make sure that that's something that public is aware of that even though we're bringing in as much money as we can that's a big significant number that's going out and not going into the services. So we do have presentations of the finance committee a couple months ago I think it was. I think for that presentation Dave we have some we have some analysis we can forward to you that looks at low case medium case by case on estimation of retiree medical so we can send it to you. So I wanted to point you to 16.4 in your packet. Those are all the FTEs that we're putting in and taking out and one in particular that you were talking about the bus operator expansion 0.5 to 0 and 20. You can come down to this and say why did nobody want to ask this question. Great. Thank you. I think the whole unfunded mandates for attention would be good to include in the financial in the budget discussion. It's out there and I'm sure you have a multi-year projection on that. We had discussion of that finance committee of some great people. We asked the question and they go there. Nobody said not today. But it will be part of the discussion. And then I just had a few questions in terms of operating revenues that you're projecting increases in fares while the ridership decreases. And it's common on that. So if that's what your prayers are facing out of our 2019 projections right now we're looking at about 2.6 million dollars of 2% decrease on passenger fares. But we have transit, special transit fares which have a 2.5% increase so it's pretty low. I mean special transit fares are UCSC contracts. Just some questions about projected increases in advertising. We actually got McDonald's back. We're loving it. I wanted to point out that McDonald's although it is 3,000 calories it already is. What do you think from retiring? The more they need to stress without paying attention. I'm sorry director just one of the things I'm talking about. As you know we're in the process of hiring a marketing director. So we're hoping that person will put some emphasis in growing that program and reminding the board our advertising program is in the mode of if you call us, we'll be happy to take your money and put your advertising on our bus. We need to flip the model and do some proactive outreach to try to grow our advertising. And I know that marketing director position has been hanging up there for a while. Is there progress on that? Good progress. A good application tool. I think it's this Monday we start interviewing. I think that's other than the discussion of grant income and I don't think we have on how much of that has been distributed from different facilities. So the grant income is from our specific station? Only? And we don't have anybody in Scott's Valley right now, but we can have tenants in Scott's Valley. I mean in Watsonville. And there was someone close for Scott's Valley just didn't work out. I mean so that's in the works getting someone there. Did materialize I think Andrew are you talking to somebody who was interested in or did that work for you? I have two more people that would follow me and email me if you want information. So it's again that I sign up there to tell us that's when I get involved in it. I just knew there's been discussion so hopefully something will come up. I just had a question about the operating revenues to AMBA grant funding. Is that a one time or is that continuing? So AMBA grants in general we tend to not budget for grants until they've been awarded because it is so and so we don't want to put that in our budget and rely on it. But we do get grants and when they come in the we just want the expenses that are incurred I guess those grants it's kind of in and out. So that is a one time then specifically. Here we go. Great, thank you. And just as was mentioned on some of the planning I know that there's been requests from the Enterprise Borland Center in Scotts Valley with UCSC up there now with another larger company and the housing and I know that that's one of the areas that is under consideration for when we can add the route back up that direction a little closer and I know I appreciate that that's been in discussion and something that we're hoping to plan for also. That's good. Other questions? Can you open up with the public? Can you open the public? I ask questions about the preliminary budget. Seeing none, a great fact for discussion. Any discussion? Moved to approve by Rockin. Second. Second by Landon. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Takes us to authorization of the traditional administrative specialist position in the Drixie's department. Good morning. Donna or Jordan do you think you could bring up the second to last slide of the previous presentation of the capitol pie chart? I think that's a good follow up for this item. I'll get started though. So this item is for a provisional administrative specialist position within the purchasing department and what this is for is really capital project administration. There's actually a typo in my staff report. I say $2.2 million a couple of projects. It's $22 million. There's no period in there. So, little bit of a difference. So we have $22 million in capital projects which equates to about 40 projects. They are this is federal money. This is state money. And they each have their own rules and administrative requirements. So it's a lot of work. And a lot of these are in the facilities maintenance department. And facilities maintenance has one administrative position. Fleet has one administrative position. Purchasing has one administrative position. So a lot of this is falling on these folks. So to administrate these capital projects which can take years. This isn't fiscal year. This is going back to 2014 right now. We're trying to close out a grant. So you're looking at multiple years of project administration and management here. So it's complex. So what I did, I'm the purchasing and special projects for 18 years doing procurement and then project management. So a lot happens in my department and we have a lot of information. We have a lot of administration that goes on in purchasing. And grants also takes on a lot of the burden of doing these administrative tasks. As well as just getting the work done actually trying to move the projects forward. So what I did was I brought an attempt employee and I downloaded everything I knew about Metro and how we do business, our grants, our procurement, our project management and kind of handed everything off to that person. And that's been going really well. So right now it's a lot of communication. I detailed some tasks that they do in the staff report. Single point of contact for all the working groups. A lot of these capital projects touch multiple departments. So you've got to communicate within the departments. We also report out to the board of directors in the monthly finance documents. We report to the CEO monthly status that kind of thing. So this employee has been doing a lot of administrative work, a lot of communication. But one thing that Alex the CEO would like is a little bit more of a hands-on approach at really moving these projects along and keeping them going. So that's one thing that we're working on. And that's going to be something like oversight of budget, oversight of schedule management. A lot of these grants have very specific milestones that you have to have your procurement done. You have to be in contract. You have to have issued a notice to proceed. Within the first six months of some of these so it's pretty tight and you can lose your funding if you don't need these milestones. Unfortunately over the last few years we have come up against that milestone too often I'm sure for Alex's taste where that funding can be at risk just because we haven't spent it. So it's kind of a nice place to be but the departments need help, facilities, fleet purchasing, grants, finance. A lot of the burden also falls on finance. They do a lot of the budget work and reporting with the grants. So the plan is that let me get back to the temp employees. So temp employees can only work 999 hours before they reach a mass limit basically and they there are some state rules about what happens with those employees. So instead of letting that employee go we'd like to bring them on as a provisional admin specialist while we further develop this project coordinator position and get a job description to you get a wage study done all that stuff and we'll bring that back to the capital committee and to the board as well very shortly. How long can a person be in a provisional position before you have to? Provisional is a minimum of 6 months you commit 6 months to them and they can go to 2 years. So we don't want to go that long obviously a provisional employee has all the benefits and rights that a permanent employee does have that limit. Thank you for the presentation. Given the capital projects are never seem to be as discreet as you hope and they take a long time is 6 months realistic or is this really do we really need to be thinking about this for a longer term position? Good. I'm going to interject myself It's a great question I think I would answer it this way I need a minimum of 6 months to figure it out I hope it won't go 2 years Erin and I are continuously sort of remolding the function that Jason is performing for us and trying to find the right mix and we need to prove that out before I come to you and say I need a permanent position and I'm concerned about it I don't like seeing a slide that says we have $22 million worth of projects there I mean it's kind of nice in some ways but when you look at how slow we're spending that down that's a problem and I really worry that as we go to DC and we say we need more money and we want you to support our grants the folks in Washington at the FTA open up a file when they look at Metro and they say well if your grants and look your spending is terrible you're just not spending the money down so why would we want you another grant if you can't spend the ones you already have that's a very real concern so we need to move these projects along and we've had too many projects recently that have come up against the deadline and we're in risk of losing money and I have a basic rule with my staff is we never give any money back here never so you can't do that and you can't constantly be in this very real mode of channeling everybody together and try to get a project out the door and not lose the money you just can't do that it's very disruptive so we have to figure out a way and we haven't quite figured it out yet we have this breadth of projects 22 million and is the right next to say this person should work on all of those some way shape or form maybe not maybe that we have to pick some of the oldest ones which could be the oldest ones and have the person in this position focus on moving those forward so all that is to say we don't know yet but we know we need some help and we'll have an answer for you when we come back even when we ask for a permanent position I just think that 22 million we won't have the pleasure of spending 22 million in six months and so what happens after that I look forward to the report Director Matthews? Just some questions I can see there's a huge amount of demand for the limited staff and it appears I know nothing of the details but it appears as though the job description is evolving and so it could well be that the person currently doing this has become very useful on a temporary basis we want to continue that person but it may also happen that as the job description evolves a huge range of responsibility from admin support basically to major capital projects that different needs evolve so when do you see that coming back to us and have you also considered contracted for project management on some very big things that would not require an internal person? Yes, so Erin and I talked about that so minimal six months to bring it back to you if we could figure this out and make it work and get that job description right and be able to prove to you that it worked we'll bring it back to you as soon as we can but no sooner than six months we absolutely will on every project that we have look at the magnitude and size of that project and what I committed to my staff is we will budget within that project contracted project management if it crosses over a certain threshold for example the Judy K. Souza building is an obvious one right so as you start coming down to smaller smaller projects where you have that threshold we have to evaluate each and every project case by case the other point that I neglected to mention is now under this new philosophy every grant that we apply for this project management we're going to put project management in that grant so the beauty of that is that we can shift project management whether that be our internal project management or contracted project management into capital and out of operating so currently it's exactly where it should be so the project manager should project their time to a capital project instead of the operating fund and help reduce the dependence on the operating fund so that's the ultimate goal but we haven't done that in the past and Wanda Mood has been directed to always look for the opportunity in each and every grant that's a project management in there but if I can add it a little bit what we're finding in a lot of these grants is that it's not an eligible expense so any kind of upfront planning design a lot of the studies that we need to do before we go into say a construction project they're not eligible expenses so staff is having to do the work in-house or we're paying consultants out of our operating budget so you're right we don't particularly want to do that whenever there's an opportunity but that is one reason to have a good in-house coordinator some sort of administrative support because often like the FTA 5339A grant that we get we get about a half a million dollars that splinters into about 15-20 projects sometimes you've seen the list lately that you can't do any design any project management construction support services anything like that it's just construction contractor so it's difficult but yes absolutely as we can find the opportunity we will I'm a little unclear why we aren't taking this permanent position we're taking about I mean to say permanent capacity I assume the person you're having in the temp position you're happy with but then you're going to make a provisional for six months and you have a person that you're happy with and that person may in fact be thinking this is an unstable job so I may be looking for a more stable job because we're not going to make this a permanent position so I'm a little unclear why we're still messing around with this permanent position since we had 22 million dollars money to actually finish project I can't argue with the logic you just conveyed I think the approach we've taken is the approach of trying to figure out what it is that this new position is going to be and what it's going to do before we make it a permanent position there absolutely is risk that we could lose the individual but there's also incentive for the individual to really work with us and help make this a success so that we can get back to you as soon as possible with a permanent position we can't guarantee him to date the job because we have to follow through a normal HR process of recruiting but as things go that person gains a lot of experience can do really well in the interview process but we have to have an open inclusive process and I don't intend to wait for six months it's not like we're not going to do anything we're going to work very hard get a job description get a wage study together Alex has been working very closely with us on this so we're hoping to bring something back and the board usually doesn't meet in July so we're going to try to bring something either June or August and get ahead of it so we're not just going to wait six months I'm sorry my main point was that years to be evolving we want to ensure that those things sync up with our future needs and then there was in our budget there was no money for temp help and so the way that we pay for temp help is through the overall fringe and benefits so if there's a savings which you do see in the budget as well vacant physicians leaves that kind of thing that's the money that we use to pay for temp we don't budget them ahead of time typically we don't have just a temp position it's usually backfilling a vacant seat from someone leaving and then this position is not in the new positions that we've talked about we haven't authorized it yet the administrative specialist is just sort of a placeholder it's the highest level admin it's the most broad duties at this time any other questions are they open up to the public are they open up to the public seeing none bring it back to the board I root for the wrong rise provisional administrative specialist for a period of about six months courtesy department and also part of the motion communicate our desire that this happen a lot quicker than the six months second directors all in favor I propose motion carries unanimously okay next is consideration of authorizing the CEO to enter into an agreement we close the landscaping zero good morning directors I'm before you here to try to spend some of this money that we have basically what we've got here is for many many years now we have pretty much an effective in our landscaping and repairs to our facilities specifically Burman and the couple hour transit center over in scott's valley we like to change that we have a little bit of an opportunity to utilize some overrun underrun funds to apply and overrun our current monthly budget what we want to do is spend the money get these items repaired and then come back to the board at a later time to ask for additional contract authority with some of the savings that we've experienced throughout this fiscal year so what the intent is basically to begin doing some of the repairs that have caused some deterioration and possible damage and we don't want to get it out any further than it's already been and we want to be able to reestablish all of our landscaping to a level that will mirror that of the lots of real transit which appears to be very successful and well received by the community and our writers so as you can see the converted facility is going to consist of some grade removal insulation of upper parking and retaining walls installation of those retaining walls with much more durable products not so much wood rather stone and concrete and installation of drip irrigation systems throughout and the planting of some low maintenance the cotton myrica plants and some pristinia trees which hopefully will root down deep so that it doesn't cause any sidewalk damage so we applied both the vermin facility and the cobaloro the drawing that cobaloro has pretty much explains we took out about 30 trees we're going to be replanting 20 of them based on this particular project that we have in some areas other than that there's some dirt exposed dirt here at the vermin facility that every time it rains it washes on to the sidewalk causes some travel impediments so we want to try to correct that and pretty much bring our systems back up to speed now that we're pretty much out of the drought and have a little bit of resilience we'd like to apply it to these two projects thanks sir any questions correct the problem I'd like to know we do have studies with the greenhouse gas emission and the reduction of the carbon footprint that we have here in our goals how do we relate this into what our goals are that we're doing that are being identified in the local jurisdictions because I mean this may spend $80,000 and sort of putting it over time it's doing something and I just want to make sure that it gets captured in the measurement of what our county is doing overall with the reduction of that has there been any conversation about you know giving this credit or it's due on that reduction well the conversations that have taken place is that we're complying with certain requirements not only from a green standpoint but also from a federal standpoint because our facilities all under what is called management program and much of what we are attempting to do here is to bring the facility up to the level in which I guess you could say the clock starts speaking over again they look at it as an improvement and they say okay we're starting the clock over it has a durable lifespan of x whatever that stat is established that is being done by the facilities department and as a result the federal government sees it as good maintenance being performed to assets that they have helped us pay for as long as we get credit for it I mean I think that's what it's about we're really I think all of us have focused really well throughout this county on that reduction and this in itself with putting in the green that we need to here and doing our part of that maintenance we should still make sure that we get something counted on that just to quickly put on that so Scotts Valley we had a lot of trees that we removed that were just actually damaging the property we had to do sidewalk and curb repair so we're replacing most of those so that's going to be kind of a wash in that case the city asked us to make sure that we would get those replaced the property here is going to have mostly plants I think we've installed the trees we're going to install for the most part but there is some block walls and whatnot better than the price tag that are fairly costly it's probably somewhat overwashed because we removed so many trees that Scotts Valley I'm all for this I think facilities should be well maintained and it definitely falls into asset management dealing with deferred maintenance a couple of points very often I don't know often we'll do it it's a really attractive landscape job and they'll put a bunch of chips on it and then they forget it and it goes downhill so my question is what is there in the way it doesn't have to be a lavish but just some kind of management because I really do think facilities should look good and they should function well and they should look good I think for the goal here is to then chosen to be drought resistant we're going for derogation that's a environmentally sound direction but I would just be interested in how we're planning for on-point maintenance so it's not a one-time deal yes I agree a thousand percent so how do we get here well we got here a little at a time and there was a lot of neglect and things just fell into disrepair and now we're in a better place and we want to go from sprinkler heads to drip systems and being low water efficient but there's a cost to restoring that so how do we keep it that way once we do it well what we do is ever since I've been here we have a twice a year walkthrough of every facility that we own so twice a year we just walk through virtually every inch of every facility we have and we take note of everything that falls into the disrepair or it looks like it's headed that direction and it goes on the list to be handled and to work towards keeping it up so I think going forward as long as we continue doing that if we see anything degrading sprinklers falling into disrepair plants falling into disrepair we'll catch it they won't be any more than a six months lag yeah but I'm just getting stuff like waiting I mean you go like I won't be in the names but some properties if I can clarify that we are tapping into a budget that is provided for landscape maintenance maintenance yes and while we're going to expend it prematurely we're going to refund it and we're going to debate with the costings that we experienced that being said this is kind of a weekly ongoing monthly type of expenditure that we have in order to maintain the facilities so it's not like we're going to do this once and let it just sit there and deteriorate the landscape contract that we have it's external it's with Coastal Landscape and Corporate so that's ongoing I think that answers your concern and just a quick on the part of the delay is the trees were roots were coming up with a sidewalk and causing some safety issues but then there were some the city was doing some things and there was some concern from the community about what would be replaced and you know sadly that process took longer because they were trying to coordinate with the city on what plants they were replacing just down the street and what we wanted to do with Metro and some of that slowed down and the good thing we have the recycled water system there so that is nice to have whatever is there is all covered in our city's recycled water program we're still talking about the city suggests that Arborist suggested a certain type of tree and Metro would like to see a small Jennifer type and so there's been some delay of our part from the city's standpoint so and coordinating to try to learn from what works in other areas Any other questions? Alright, anyone from the public I totally agree with this title Seeing none, bring it back I move approval Director Little, the motion second by Kaufman-Gelmez All in favor? Opposed? The motion carries the answer Okay, item 19 is consider a declaration of emergency and authorization of services or serve pro Ciro again Yes, this particular project was developed due to the the compromise areas there in the specific station that allowed the intrusion of water during this rainy season as a result of we solicited serve pro to come in and review our leakage areas and determine what we're coming from during that process they identified some conditions that existed that one there was a clear understanding that there was a breach in the wall causing some contamination noted there and they were not sure about the other walls there's three areas there's a northwest restroom and the employee lounge an administrative office area in the second level and the information booth down below in the lobby those three areas sustained some damage on the leakage that we have in the water intrusion when serve pro came out and identified that there was this leakage and they were attempting to identify where the leakage was coming from they noted that there was a breach in the wall in the bathroom on the northwest lounge that breach allowed them to visually see that there was some contamination of some sort we immediately closed the restroom down in contact with a company called Pro Terra they came out and did sampling of the walls sampling of the breached wall because of that nature it was determined and reported back to the Metro that there was some elevated score levels in that bathroom that was closed rendered unusable and we proceeded to concern ourselves with trying to mitigate the situation of the restroom and the other areas that were identified as having some water intrusion as a result the walls, they contained the walls they contained the walls in the restroom they contained the walls in the administrative office in discussions with the company they said that yes there were some elevated aspects to the score level that they were not detrimental to a severe case we just took the extra measure of responding in order to try to mitigate this situation further because we were unable because we wanted to have this done quickly we did not go through a a bit process and as a result we're coming to the board asking that we pretty much go along and have this have a sole source and offer lunch to enter into the contract and pay for the services that have been rendered as we speak now I'm having a container brought over to the Pacific Station so that the remaining portion of the information would be dismantled to see what was going to be what the damages they've been inside there I need to move all the employees over to that container and have the services provided from that container any questions Dr. Matthews a whole lot of questions open up Pandora's box here literally so were they able to determine where the leak was from the majority of the leaks are all coming from the windows two areas facing the Pacific Avenue have occurred windows above the information as currently known yes and it sounds to me as though the extent of the damage is still not known if you're going to tear apart the customer service who is still as long as the walls are not compromised there is no danger it's only when the wall is compromised that's why the restroom is shut down that wall is compromised the structural part of the wall we're talking about the drywall it says here that the estimate does not include the replacement of building materials so what does the the 15,000 cover and what does it not cover it's going to cover the remaining portion of the tear dam of the walls to determine the extent of damage so there will be more to do and I think that raises the question of the total cost for this project which is a big question mark we went through this of the city building not recently you start getting interested in every city building well we do not have an order of magnitude until there is a tear in the wall so that gets me to a question about an overall building assessment and I if you can tell me where that building assessment is and has it even grappled with this and this big unknown as well because all that figures into discussions we're going to be having soon about replacement they're not soon enough to be replaced whether or not we tear the whole building down I know that immediate things have to be done so I understand we don't know how bad this is going to get with what we understand but I'd like to also just know when do we get that building assessment and how much does it cover and how can we move forward on the weighting of options yes so director through the capital committee we initiated a full assessment of that building which was before this to include opening up some walls so that we can understand what's going on inside of that building structure so if there was a positive to this it helped us open up a few more walls so we can see what's going on in that building that assessment is looking at not only structural but electrical HVAC, flooring, plumbing everything so that we can get a good idea should we desire to invest in that facility and rehabilitate it how much that would cost that number is scheduled to be delivered to the capital committee as you're now a member of that in April so that we can look at that cost of replacement rehabilitation in comparison to whatever we're going to be trying to talk about a whole new facility so at some point there may be a place in which it makes a lot more sense to go with the city on a new facility than to invest in the existing facility we're trying to find out what that is in the meantime unfortunately as director Rudkin just mentioned I have an obligation to my employees to make sure that I'm in a safe environment you know this argument we all have that same obligation we must do what we have to do to fix to fix the problems with the windows and the walls and what not and get it all closed back up and it's unfortunate because I would rather use that money over on the other side of the equation whether it be a new facility or a total rehab but I have to do it I have to do to button it down this year was just extraordinary with the rains the rain found every possible place it could find to get into that facility I just have to fix it I've got to give our employees a good place to work I was under the impression that the facility report had been done it was a preliminary both the committee and myself were very unhappy with it it didn't go far enough so we directed a much larger contract to really get into every aspect of plumbing electrical, heating, walls structural everything you expect the capital committee will have that for us is there a worst challenge for April right? yes reports from Bowman and Williams have indicated that they are already in the process of finalizing the report provided to Mr. Clifford for that presentation we took advantage of the fact that these walls having been torn apart allowed them to get a better perspective of the condition of the under structure of that building and is that report going into the status of the auxiliary rental places you know the little shops that are separated or only to the abandoned building the stuff on the island the islands, the kiosks again the question is is the facilities report going into the status of the kiosk area or only the main building? no it's the main building the kiosks we've had several tenants there that have done a lot of repair work through the kiosks matter of fact one of the most recent new tenants has completely redone the interior of one of the kiosks completely so the main focus was for the main building again I understand the reason for that that's our operational need but if we're looking at the whole facility at some point we're going to have to look at the whole business if we can get that report as much in advance of the actual capital meetings or the chance to look at it that's our goal from the capital committee position and I think this actually is a good time for us because we had a preliminary report which didn't mean our needs the secondary report did a deeper dive into what we needed to find out and by opening up these glass walls I think this is going to give us a very good synopsis of what's actually going on in that building so I think this unfortunately we're going to find some problems but I think it's going to give us the answers we want is what condition that building is really in correct or wrong? Did you mention something previously that this building was in trouble or is this a sudden kind of thing I mean it did rain last year and so did we not know I mean the preliminary report didn't miss it or what? We have been bandating that building for a very long time you may recall that last year we came to the board and asked for money to put a new roof on it to minimize all of the windows so that we could address what's causing this problem but once we got into that it became a much deeper issue because we discovered as Director Bontrof warned us that if we're not careful we might remove windows and discover that you need to remove another part and where does it end it could become instead of a couple hundred thousand dollar project it could become a million dollars or more project so we backed it down from replacing the roof and the windows to slow it down a little bit and try to understand a little bit more about what is behind those before we start pulling them out and then that brought us then to this winter and the eventuality of having to open it up anyway to look inside how old is this for someone eighty four you were very proud of me no I don't know if I may expand just a little bit on just to indicate the answer to your question the discovery of this particular situation was happened this time as we experienced it just happened to saturate the wall in that bathroom sufficiently to where it separated when it separated and that there was a compromise to the ceiling factor which was the wall and that there was contamination behind that yeah well this is depressing because there's no need to blame for this it's depressing because there's a situation where you're spending money that probably is going to be useless in the long run or even the median run but there's no choice but to do it you know so I do support the staff of the recommendation can you tell us what it would be study of the underground chemical issues under the building because that's another factor about whether we have to turn the building down anyway or those kind of issues that's at the county of Atlanta off the department where's that at now have you heard anything from the county yet their deadline was sometime in March I believe March 15 their letter back as I told you back in January and February we submitted a final report on our analysis on January 15 they're allowed 60 days to get back to us to follow up today but we hope to have that because they all go together it's a really difficult decision yeah and depending on what the mayor finds out we may engage our board supervisor I'm trying to stay on the topic here about super I have to I'm prepared to move that motion because I don't think you have any choice any other questions anybody from the public seeing none I'll bring it back approval of staff recommendation second motion by Rochkin second by the airport I know that our economic development director has also been talking with the county about the whole soil issue as well and feeling some frustration on several accounts and we just had a presentation from the county about their desire to work with their partners so let's we'll have a check if there's an issue that one of the board reps here could help with we didn't want to use that card prematurely we know you're there thank you okay motion second all in favor I oppose motion carries unanimously okay review of items to be discussed in closed session we'll be discussing later negotiation we will not have a report out of the closed session okay if anyone that would want to address anything we're going to discuss in closed session seeing none make an announcement as our next meeting will be Friday April 26 at 9 a.m. in beautiful Scotts Valley with that we'll go ahead and recess to closed session